DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Villis (WO 2017027912 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Villis discloses a rear-conveyor fruit harvester (harvester shown in fig. 8), comprising:
a primary conveyor (laterally-positioned side conveyor system (not shown), paragraph 0068) with a downstream rear end (outlet duct 74) located towards the rear of the rear-conveyor fruit harvester, the primary conveyor positioned on the inside of the rear-conveyor fruit harvester and configured, in use, for collecting harvested material from a plant being harvested and conveying it downstream;
a diagonally ascending side conveyor (76) having an upstream bottom end and a downstream top end; and,
a sorter (1, 26) extending laterally from the primary conveyor towards the diagonally ascending side conveyor, the sorter comprising:
a continuous rear conveyor (26) that rotates about an upstream shaft and a downstream shaft, and
an array of rollers (4) located above the continuous rear conveyor, the array of rollers having projections that arc radially outwards (star wheels 6), the rollers being spaced apart to provide openings (31) to allow transit of individual pieces of fruit from harvested material but impede the transit of waste (paragraph 0031), and wherein the rollers of the sorter and the shafts of the continuous conveyor rotate in the same direction to direct harvested material from the primary conveyor laterally towards the diagonally ascending side conveyor (76), and
wherein an upstream portion of the sorter (1, 26) is positioned adjacent to, or underneath, the rear end (74) of the primary conveyor, and a downstream portion of the sorter (1, 26) is positioned underneath a fan (81) and above the upstream bottom end of the diagonally ascending side conveyor (see fig. 8, the sorter (1 and 26) is positioned beneath 81 and above the bottom/upstream end of 76).
PNG
media_image1.png
620
688
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
384
539
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Villis discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the sorter (1) comprises an upstream portion of the sorter is a receiving end that receives fruit from the rear end (74) of the primary conveyor and the downstream portion is an output end, the sorter being configured, in use, to move harvested material from the receiving end towards the output end (see arrows 25, fig. 2 and 4), and
wherein the array of rollers (4) spans the distance between the receiving end of the sorter and the output end of the sorter (see fig. 1-6, 8).
Regarding claim 4, Villis discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the projections (6) extend perpendicularly from the axis of the shaft of the roller (4) in an arc away from the direction of rotation of the radially-extending rollers (paragraph 0057).
Regarding claim 6, Villis discloses the apparatus of claim 2, wherein the sorter (1) includes a ramped portion such that the output end of the sorter is positioned higher than the receiving end of the sorter (see fig. 8).
Regarding claim 8, Villis discloses the apparatus of claim 2, wherein the rear conveyor (26) comprises an upstream, inner end configured for positioning substantially underneath the receiving end of the sorter (1) and a downstream, outer end configured for positioning substantially underneath the output end of the sorter (see fig. 8, 26 is vertically below both ends of sorter 1), and
wherein the rear conveyor (26) is configured, in use, for collecting fruit that transits downwards through the sorter and conveying the fruit off of the outer end of the rear conveyor (paragraph 0059).
Regarding claim 10, Villis discloses the apparatus of claim 1, comprising one or more separators (3, 41), each separator comprising a separating conveyor (see fig. 5) and a de-stemmer (paragraph 0064),
wherein the separator is configured for positioning above the bottom end of the side conveyor (76) to directly or indirectly receive harvested material from the rear conveyor, and/or from the sorter (paragraphs 0064-66).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Villis (WO 2017027912 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Villis discloses the apparatus of claim 8.
Villis does not disclose wherein a vertical distance between the inner end of the rear conveyor and the receiving end of the sorter is at least 50 mm.
Paragraphs 0017-18 of Villis recognize that the incline angle and length of the conveyors (2, 3) are important in maximizing the effective separation of berries from waste matter, and that the incline angle may be selected from a given range. Examiner also notes that given the general practical scale of machines of this type, the spaces would appear to be in largely in excess of 50mm (see fig. 8, the distance between 26 and 2, 3 is shown to be clearly greater than 50mm).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to contrive any number of desirable ranges for the angle of inclination of the sorting conveyors, including one resulting in a vertical distance of 50 mm between the inner end of the rear conveyor and the receiving end of the sorter, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Further, it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Refer to MPEP § 2144.05.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12-13, 15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new grounds of rejection identify the sorter to be both elements 1 and 26 of Villis (WO 2017027912 A1). Applicant’s argument that Villis does not disclose a sorter with a downstream portion positioned beneath a fan and above an upstream bottom end of a diagonally ascending side conveyor is addressed in the rejection of claim 1 above, where fig. 8 shows the sorter (1 and 26) is positioned beneath the fan (81) and above the bottom/upstream end of the diagonally ascending side conveyor (76).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MADELINE RUNCO whose telephone number is (469)295-9123. The examiner can normally be reached 8-4:30 M-F.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joseph Rocca can be reached at 5712728971. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MADELINE I RUNCO/ Examiner, Art Unit 3671